Pages

Thursday, July 1, 2021

Battle of Montgomery: History Repeats

As mentioned in the previous post, recreating the 1644 Battle of Montgomery was up next on the gaming table.  In a long overdo change of pace, the battle would be fought F2F.  It has been a very long time since the gaming table last witnessed a F2F battle.

The battle would be fought as a two-player game with Kevin taking the Royalists and Scott commanding the Parliamentarian Army.

Brief situation: Royalists, under Byron, are besieging Montgomery.  Meldrum has crossed the River Camlads in order to lift the siege and resupply the town and garrison.  Meldrum sends out a foraging party of cavalry to bring in supplies for both his troops and the besieged troops within Montgomery.  Seeing that his command outnumbers Meldrum after Meldrum sent off about 30% of his cavalry, Byron orders an attack to drive the Roundheads into the river.  Camlads is only crossable at Salt Bridge.  Meldrum is outnumbered but expecting his foraging party to be recalled and return at some point in the battle.  Byron is overconfident and does not offer much in personal command for the battle.  Lothian's Chelshire foote have sworn to stand and will fight to the death.

Initial dispositions
Royalists win if the Parliamentarian Army can be broken before it falls back across the River Camlads to safety.  Parliamentarians win if the Royalists can be broken and the siege lifted.  Parliamentarians gain a minor victory if they can cross back over the River Camlads to safety before their army is broken.

Historically, Meldrum won the battle even though outnumbered.  Several deployment variations are hypothesized.  I chose the deployment will the cavalry massed upon the Royalist left. 

How did the action unfold?  Please follow the action below:

Seeing that he outnumbers his adversary, Byron seizes the initiative and moves his cavalry to begin the battle.  Royalists are on the left in the photo above.
All of Tyldesley's cavalry regiments advance out onto the plain to gain the central position.
One of Fairfax' cavalry regiments charges into the lead Royalist cavalry regiment.  Casualties are heavy to both but both regiments remain engaged.
Byron orders all foote to advance down the slope and takes the battle to the outnumbered enemy on the plain below.
More cavalry clashes are seen in the center of the battlefield while the Royalist foote advance steadily toward its foe.
Cavalry on the Royalist left fall back to recover having fought several telling melees.  One Roundhead foote is driven back by a well-placed volley. 
Another cavalry clash near the Salt Bridge.  Both have their generals attached in an attempt to sway the outcome.
With Roundhead horse and foote making their way onto the plain and pushing back their opposition, the Royalist left is threatened by the timely arrival of the Roundhead foraging party upon the left.
At this point in the battle, Byron is killed and Broughton's infantry loses its nerve.  Broughton's command falls back to the seeming safety of the heights. 
Fairfax' cavalry attempts to surround the Royalist horse and discourages them from continuing offensive action.  The Royalists are looking to be hemmed-in on their left and front.
The entire Royalist Army retraces its steps back up onto the high ground.  The Royalists seem to relinquish the ground taken too easily. 
The Royalists ring the high ground awaiting an attack from Meldrum.
One Roundhead cavalry regiment turns the Royalist left as pressure mounts toward the front.  Roundhead infantry begin the long slog up the slopes to meet the enemy. 
Royalist cavalry charges to stop the turning of its battle line. 
Fighting is fierce and the Roundheads are driven back.  Royalist cavalry fall back to regroup.  Woodhouse's infantry form up into anti-cavalry defenses  
while the cavalry continue withdrawing back onto the upper slopes.
On the Royalist right, the dragoons anchoring the Royalist position are driven off by a determined attack.
Both flanks have been turned and Tyldesley's cavalry have broken!

With Meldrum closing the noose upon his enemy, the Royalist position is lost.
The Royalists flee the field and the siege of Montgomery is lifted.

Victory to Meldrum and the Parliamentarian Army!

Well!  That was quite a sharp action and while the outcome was historical, the result was surprising.  Surprising since the battle unfolded much like the actual event.  Bryon's army was making good progress in the early stage of battle and drove back both horse and foote before them.  When the Roundhead foraging party arrived upon the left, Bryon seemed to lose all confidence and gave up his advantage in numbers.  Of course, officer casualties were very heavy with Byron or his replacement being shot from the saddle on three occasions.  Good game by both Scott and Kevin.

This battle will be refought with the UK Monday Night Group remotely on Tuesday.  It will be interesting to see if the next battle trial sees the same result as this one.  Whatever the outcome, I hope the battle presents an engaging contest.

56 comments:

  1. Excellent game with fine looking figures and terrain, Jonathan! Congrats on having such engaging F2F event.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you, Dmitry! Very pleased that you enjoyed this.

      Delete
  2. Great looking game and narrative. A most enjoyable read.

    ReplyDelete
  3. A great report on a seesaw of a fight. Figures look great, table is pleasantly set. Great to be gaming.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Joe, this battle did have some exciting back and forth although Fairfax' cavalry overpowered its opponent with the arrival of reinforcements. Great to be gaming, for sure.

      Delete
  4. Cracking battle there, loved the to and thro just how I imagine an ECW clash.

    ReplyDelete
  5. An actioned packed game and looks great!

    Christopher

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Action packed, for sure! It was a fun contest to adjudicate as the two players smashed into each other time and time again.

      Delete
  6. A wonderful report on an action packed engagement Jon - as mentioned, we played this same scenario a few months ago but the Parliamentarians were less successful, as it ended in a draw, although the returning cavalry force had a similar impact as in your game (and in real life, presumably) - my account of our game is here https://1808534.blogspot.com/search?q=montgomery

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you, Keith! I remember your battle account. Miller's scenario has the cavalry deployed on the royalist right rather than the left if I recall. I think he got it backwards from using Giglio as the basis for his work.

      Delete
  7. Great looking game with lots of action.
    I am so tempted to start an ECW project, but I think back to the number of 28mm ECW armies I've painted and sold and think nah....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, Paul! As fast as you paint, you would have two playable armies fielded in no time.

      Delete
  8. Love the ebb and flow - and a good-looking ECW was just what I needed for inspiration, thanks!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Happy to provide a little inspiration for your own project, Markus!

      Delete
  9. Great report. Beautiful game with outstanding terrain and figures.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Congratulations on getting your first F2F game for a long time. Good idea to run this F2F before running the remote game.

    That Initial Dispositions pic looks just like a colour version of one of those contemporary engravings.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you! F2F is slowly picking up here. One F2F game two weeks ago and another scheduled for Saturday.

      Glad you enjoy the overhead battle photo. Helps me to see the entire battlefield before the chaos begins.

      Delete
  11. Impressive and inspiring ECW gaming, Jonathan! Reminds me that I need to get a Pike & Shotte ECW inaugural game in soon.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are most kind, Dean! I look forward to seeing your first ECFW battle.

      Delete
  12. Thanks for all the pics and I liked your ‘trademark’ Initial Dispositions shot. Will you tweak anything for the remote game or do you feel this is balanced enough to stand on its own two feet?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are welcome, Norm! Glad you enjoyed the photos. Sometimes I wonder if I include too many.

      With both armies having plenty of opportunity for victory, the only tweak I may make is to introduce the possibility of one more turn of delay for the reinforcing foraging party. With their numerical advantage, the Royalists really need to strike while the iron is hot.

      Delete
  13. Wonderful report to read. Our replay of the battle saw the Royalist cavalry be quite successful, the foot in the centre less so. The end result was the same though.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you so much! I have been enjoying your battle reports as well.

      Delete
  14. Cromwell will be pleased with this result.

    Lovely looking game Jon and an enjoyable read!

    ReplyDelete
  15. Splendid looking game and how good is it to be back to face to face gaming? Always good when you feel either side could win at some point!
    Best Iain

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you, Iain! I think both had a reasonable chance at victory.

      Delete
  16. Fantastic return to the tabletop in F2F!

    I really like your little black dice 'holders' for indicating some unit condition.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, it has been really good to get the ECW collection out the table over the last couple of weeks. It will be out on the table next week for a remote game.

      You know, if you and Codsticker are interested in playing this version of Montgomery remotely, we can discuss details.

      The dice eliminate a need for a roster as well as being visible from the table and webcam.

      Delete
  17. Lovely stuff Jonathan. I am in the process of organising some ECW figures for my painting queue (likely some way off) with a view to using them for DBR initially. Those rules call for four musketeers on a base, the same as the pike, which seems odd to me as I much prefer the look of 3 spaced out as you have them here. Looking at your collection reinforces that viewpoint for me.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, Lawrence! Always good to base your figures in a manner that is pleasing to you. I find that most rules can accommodate a different basing scheme as long as both sides are based the same. Good luck on your project!

      Delete
  18. A great way to get back to 'normal' - good to be back to FtF gaming isn't it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Greg! Great to hear from you again. It has been a very long time. hope all is well with you as we return to normal operations here in WA State.

      Delete
  19. It's somehow disillusioning to see that history repeats again and again. I had the same experience even in many of our smaller games. But no problem as it is feeling OK if the game is entertaining never the less. Thank you immensely for your detailed reports.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Having history repeat itself on the gaming table suggests to me that the history outcome was a not fluke of chance. For a set of rules, it I good to have a historical outcome as a possibility.

      Glad you enjoyed the battle report, Andrè!

      Delete
  20. Very nice looking game. Ilike to see history being recreated it shows that the rules are doing something right.

    It is nice to get F2F gaming again - Zoom is still good but better for an occasional outing rather than all the time

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you, David! One big benefit of remote gaming is that is allows one to game with gamers, groups, and rules which otherwise would be difficult if not impossible to experience F2F.

      Delete
  21. Lovely looking game Jon and nice to see FTF gaming back on. I do like the ECW perhaps one day ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you! On liking ECW, are you thinking starting a new project or simply playing a game? I can help with the latter but only offer encouragement on the former.

      Delete
  22. Glad that you’re getting in F2F as well as virtual gaming; your cup runeth over as they say. 😀
    Nice battle report and great looking table.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, lots of gaming; now on two fronts!

      Glad you enjoyed the battle report. Thank you.

      Delete
  23. Interesting report, pretty battle, many thanks. I must dig out a scenario and give this one a go myself.

    Thinking of how close it was to the historical outcome, I like that too, since it gives me more confidence in the ruleset.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are welcome! My thought is that it never hurts to match the historical result as your battle outcome.

      Delete
  24. An excellent report and good looking game.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Never too many photos! The good ones like this can be enjoyed, others can be slid past.

    Must have felt good just to be there! But the game sounded hard fought and engaging with a solid ending which, win or lose is often better than an exhausted draw.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are most kind, Ross! It was good fun to host a F2F game after such a long hiatus. While I enjoy remote gaming, I discover that running a remote game more work. Having an enjoyable, mid-game lunch break is a bonus too!

      Delete
  26. Excellent battle report Jonathan, the Royalists lose again, F2F seems to ebb and flow nicely though, I have not tried them for pike and musket rules yet.

    cheers
    Matt

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you, Matt! We will give the battle another try on Tuesday.

      Delete
  27. A great report and lovely photos, Jon! The big variable at Montgomery is when the foraging cavalry return. If they are late to the party, the Royalists have a shot. Otherwise, they have to be very lucky to win!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Glad you enjoyed the report, Peter! I am surprised that you think the Royalists need to be very lucky to win. While the Roundhead command structure is better, the Royalists can bring more troops to bear. Even after the foraging party shows up on the battlefield, Meldrum remains outnumbered.

      Delete